Oceanography The Official Magazine of
The Oceanography Society
Volume 36 Issue 1

View Issue TOC
Volume 36, No. 1
Pages 38 - 43


Know Before You Go: A Community-Derived Approach to Planning for and Preventing Sexual Harassment at Oceanographic Field Sites

By Abby Ackerman , Kristen Yarincik , Stephanie Murphy, Ivona Cetinić, Allison Fundis, Allison Miller, Emily Shroyer, Aly Busse, Qu’Derrick Covington, Annette DeSilva, Alison Haupt, Leah Johnson, Craig Lee, Laura Lorenzoni, Brandi Murphy, Jennifer Ramarui, Brad Rosenheim, and Deborah Steinberg 
Jump to
Article Abstract Full text Citation References Copyright & Usage
Article Abstract

Sexual harassment is a pervasive problem on oceanographic research vessels and while conducting fieldwork in general. A variety of factors contribute to inadequate protection against sexual harassment, such as poor training in prevention, support, and response; remoteness of field sites; academic hierarchies that reinforce uneven power dynamics that extend to fieldwork; and multi-institutional teams with distinct policies or reporting structures that can lead to confusion in reporting and responding to incidents in the field. In compromising individuals’ physical and mental health, sexual harassment can negatively affect research expeditions. For example, harassed individuals may decide to refrain from working on complicated team-based tasks, which can be a safety issue. A broader concern is that sexual harassment deters talented people from pursing or maintaining employment in ocean science. Harassment must be treated with the same gravity as research misconduct and safety policy infringements. When planning a research expedition, science team leaders are responsible for the safety of their team and other colleagues aboard and would benefit from resources aimed at helping team leadership create a plan to ensure safety and inclusivity. To address this resource gap, 18 participants in the Workshop to Promote Field Safety in Ocean Sciences, convened by the Consortium for Ocean Leadership and held May 17–18, 2022, in Washington, DC, developed a checklist for use by scientific leaders and others to assist in planning for participant safety and to prevent harassment the field. The checklist specifies the timing of, and who is responsible for, specific actions that should be taken to improve safety while conducting fieldwork, whether on a research vessel or on land. It also provides additional resources and suggestions for leaders on how to amend the checklist to address their specific fieldwork situations.

Full Text


Sexual harassment in ocean science is pervasive. According to a recent report by Women in Ocean Science (2021), 78% of surveyed females have experienced sexual harassment in their workplaces or learning environments, with fieldwork representing the most common location for such experiences. While individual perceptions (regardless of legal definitions) of what constitutes harassment and bullying might vary, with some defending behavior as, for example, universally difficult personalities or cultural overcorrection (e.g., Harris, 2022), for the purposes of this discussion, sexual harassment includes gender-based harassment (e.g., threats, slurs, lewd comments and images, promoting stereotypes, demonstrating bias and discrimination, or other hateful conduct), unwanted sexual attention, and sexual coercion. It is not limited to those who identify as women; it can also be aimed at perceived sexual orientation and gender identity.

Fieldwork can be a training ground for students, a requirement for earning a degree in geoscience, and a deciding factor in recruiting and retaining individuals to the field. Shafer et al. (2022) analyzed geoscience job postings and found that over 60% of Earth science job postings aimed at bachelor’s-level graduates listed “field skills” as a desired qualification and was the second-most prevalent qualification of the 34 skills the study examined across over 1,000 unique job postings. It follows that broad access to and positive experiences in fieldwork can lead to increased recruitment and retention in the field (Nelson et al., 2017; NASEM, 2018; Marín-Spiotta et al., 2020).

Environments that promote, normalize, or deal ineffectively with sexual and other forms of harassment are unsafe for researchers and staff, and can negatively impact both the mental and the physical health of people who experience harassment, as well as those of bystanders (Armstrong et al., 2018; Marín-Spiotta et al., 2020). Physical distance from an individual’s home institution while conducting fieldwork, paired with the power imbalances inherent to the hierarchical nature of academia and STEM leadership that is historically dominated by white men, can create or amplify a hostile or dangerous climate for people with marginalized genders or other marginalized identities (Marín-Spiotta et al., 2020; Kelly and Yarincik, 2022). People whose identities intersect multiple marginalized groups are at higher risk for harassment (NASEM, 2018) and can experience both racial and sexual harassment simultaneously or experience racially motivated sexual harassment (Armstrong et al., 2018). Given the lack of diversity in geosciences in the United States (e.g., Bernard and Cooperdock, 2018), ensuring that people at all career stages are protected from racial-, ethnic-, gender-, or ability-​based harassment is crucial to creating a more diverse and equitable field—and it’s simply the right thing to do. Everyone deserves to be treated with respect in their workplace or learning environment, and a climate of respect has been found to lead to reductions in identity-based harassment (Robotham and Cortina, 2021).

Due to the many factors that can contribute to an “unsafe” field site, which range from personal- to institutional-​level concerns, there is no single solution to making field sites safer from sexual harassment. Instead, ensuring field safety requires multiple policies and best practices that cover a wide range of topics, timescales, and levels of responsibility. Broadly speaking, there are three dimensions of safety that need to be addressed at field sites: harassment prevention, support for those who experience harassment, and response to incidents.

Current policies and social norms at many institutions are insufficient for ensuring inclusive and harassment-free environments (NASEM, 2018). In the field, participant safety also suffers from this isolating culture and a lack of clear and enforced policies, compounded by an environment with multi-institutional—and sometimes multinational—teams and field sites under various jurisdictions, and this complexity can complicate the question of responsibility when it comes to addressing instances of harassment or assault (Kelly and Yarincik, 2022). To remedy this situation, institutions and vessel operators must create and routinely update policies for harassment prevention, support, and response. Critically, once such policies exist, to be effective, institutions must communicate the policies consistently to all working at a field site and enforce them. In addition, those in positions of authority must be familiar with the policies so that they are equipped to assist targets of harassment—assuming they are reported (Clancy et al., 2014; Nelson et al., 2017; Steinhardt, 2018). Unfortunately, of the individuals who have reported their harassment or assault, few say they have been satisfied with the outcomes of reporting (Clancy et al., 2014), and this situation has likely led to underreporting of harassment incidents.

Bystander training in intervention and reporting should be a regular part of field instruction (Kelly and Yarincik, 2022). While ensuring the safety and culture of a field expedition often falls on those in charge, such as chief scientists and principal investigators (PIs), all participants have a role to play in creating a positive culture and demonstrating lack of tolerance for poor behavior.


Developing a Safety Checklist

The Workshop to Promote Field Safety in Ocean Sciences, convened by the Consortium for Ocean Leadership and held May 17–18, 2022, in Washington, DC, was a follow-on event to the 2021 Workshop to Promote Safety in Field Sciences, which aimed to build a safer and more inclusive field culture for participants of all backgrounds and identities. The 18 participants assembled a set of broad recommendations to inspire and guide different audiences and actors in field science to address harassment in a collaborative, community-based manner. The ocean-focused workshop used the Report of the Workshop to Promote Safety in Field Sciences (Kelly and Yarincik, 2022) as a foundational document to guide the development of recommended actions specific to the ocean science community and ocean science field platforms. Participants represented a variety of career stages and sectors of expertise, including but not limited to academic and federal seagoing scientists, UNOLS members, private research vessel operators, and others interested in promoting safety and inclusion, in order to reflect a broad range of experiences and to reduce bias when crafting recommendations. The workshop operated on the premise that, in addition to being research misconduct, harassment and assault are health and safety hazards and, accordingly, should be taken as seriously as other health and safety hazards on research vessels and other field stations or platforms.

Workshop participants developed a vessel safety checklist to provide specific and realistic steps that managers, policymakers, and field team leaders in the ocean sciences community can implement immediately to improve policies and processes related to safety and to positively impact the culture of ocean science. By following the structure and timeline often used for scientific and logistical planning, the checklist aims to integrate safety into pre-, syn-, and post-cruise activities by outlining how and when to implement practices for preventing harassment, supporting targets of harassment, and encouraging reporting of incidents. The framework is intended to be flexible enough to allow institutions or individuals to amend the list as necessary for their unique purposes or as they learn new best practices. Implementation of the checklist should be treated as an iterative process that evolves with feedback and experience to better serve the community’s goals.


The Safety Checklist: Responsibility, Conduct, and Policies

While safety at sea requires that everyone bear some responsibility for keeping themselves and their colleagues safe, in developing this checklist (Table 1), workshop participants specifically envisioned it as a resource for PIs, chief scientists, and organizations. Though it is not exhaustive, it should help them prepare strategies for keeping all field participants safe from harassment and bullying. Planning should begin as early as proposal development. The National Science Foundation, in particular its Directorate for Geosciences, recently announced that several solicitations will require submission of a plan for safe and inclusive work environments, pointing to the importance that funding agencies are beginning to put on harassment as a safety issue (see NSF, 2023, Chapter II Section E.9).


TABLE 1. Checklist to promote field safety for chief scientists, principal investigators, and field team leads. The checklist is organized by three categories: When the action needs to occur, what the action is, and what dimension of preventing or responding to harassment it addresses. > High res table


The items in Table 1 serve to ensure that critical communications and policies related to safety planning are not overlooked, including the creation of individual codes of conduct that represent the shared values of the field team and organizations involved in each expedition; identifying mandatory reporters and additional trained resource providers (Kelly and Yarincik, 2022); clarifying multi-​institutional roles and responsibilities that can confuse reporting of and response to sexual harassment (Kelly and Yarincik, 2022); and thinking through traditions that may not feel inclusive to those new to seagoing research, such as milestone ceremonies (UNOLS MERAS Committee, 2019). One common theme throughout the checklist is clear, consistent, two-way communication among the science team members who will be on board.

The left column of the safety checklist (Table 1) lays out when actions need to be taken relative to the research expedition. Not all expeditions will have the same planning timelines. The PI or chief scientist should be responsible for managing the safety checklist and ensuring that each action is executed, and at the appropriate time. Table 2 directs the PI or chief scientist to resources available to support the recommended safety planning and preparation actions in the checklist.


TABLE 2. Resources available to support safety planning and preparation actions. This list is not inclusive of all existing and developing resources to support field safety planning and preparation, but it provides a starting point to help build knowledge and capacity for actions identified in Table 1. > High res table
> Go to the article pdf for live links to the resources in this table



As is true for almost every other aspect of working in the field, preparation is the key to success. Having a plan in place to prevent sexual harassment, support targets, and respond to incidents on a ship is key both to the short-term goal of safely and positively completing field research and to the long-term goal of preventing attrition of talented scientists. It is important for teams going into the field to implement policies, trainings, and other measures that make participants safer from sexual harassment.



This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under grant OCE-1938766. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation, NASA, or the Department of Defense or its components. We thank two reviewers whose comments improved this manuscript.

Ackerman, A., K. Yarincik, S. Murphy, I. Cetinić, A. Fundis, A. Miller, E. Shroyer, A. Busse, Q. Covington, A. DeSilva, A. Haupt, L. Johnson, C. Lee, L. Lorenzoni, B. Murphy, J. Ramarui, B. Rosenheim, and D. Steinberg. 2023. Know before you go: A community-derived approach to planning for and preventing sexual harassment at oceanographic field sites. Oceanography 36(1):38–43, https://doi.org/10.5670/oceanog.2023.112.


Armstrong, E.A., M. Gleckman-Krut, and L. Johnson. 2018. Silence, power, and inequality: An intersectional approach to sexual violence. Annual Review of Sociology 44(1):99–122, https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-soc-073117-041410.

Bernard, R., and E. Cooperdock 2018. No progress on diversity in 40 years. Nature Geoscience 11:292–295, https://doi.org/​10.1038/s41561-018-0116-6.

Clancy, K.B.H., R.G. Nelson, J.N. Rutherford, and K. Hinde. 2014. Survey of Academic Field Experiences (SAFE): Trainees report harassment and assault. PLoS ONE 9(7):e102172, https://doi.org/​10.1371/​journal.pone.0102172.

Harris, M. 2022. “For an Ill-Fated Science Cruise, a Sea of Allegations.” Undark, March 9, 2022, https://undark.org/2022/03/09/​for-​an-​ill-​fated-​science-cruise-a-sea-of-allegations/.

Kelly, A., and K. Yarincik. 2022. Report of the Workshop to Promote Safety in Field Sciences. Consortium for Ocean Leadership and California State University Desert Studies, March 24–26, 2021, 39 pp, https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.​5841983.

Marín-Spiotta, E., R.T. Barnes, A.A. Berhe, M.G. Hastings, A. Mattheis, B. Schneider, and B.M. Williams. 2020. Hostile climates are barriers to diversifying the geosciences. Advances in Geosciences 53:117–127, https://doi.org/10.5194/adgeo-53-117-2020.

NASEM (National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine.) 2018. Sexual Harassment of Women: Climate, Culture, and Consequences in Academic Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. The National Academies Press, 312 pp., https://doi.org/10.17226/24994.

Nelson, R.G., J.N. Rutherford, K. Hinde, and K.B.H. Clancy. 2017. Signaling safety: Characterizing fieldwork experiences and their implications for career trajectories. American Anthropologist 119(4):710–722, https://doi.org/​10.1111/aman.12929.

NSF (National Science Foundation). 2023. Proposal and Award Policies and Procedures Guide. NSF 23-1, 203 pp.

Robotham, K., and L. Cortina. 2021. Promoting respect as a solution to workplace harassment. Equality, Diversity and Inclusion 40(4):410–429, https://doi.org/10.1108/EDI-04-2019-0137.

Shafer, G., K. Viskupic, and A. Egger. 2022. Analysis of skills sought by employers of bachelors-​level geoscientists. GSA Today 32(2):34–35, https://doi.org/​10.1130/GSATG510GW.1.

Steinhardt, S.B. 2018. The Instrumented Ocean: How Sensors, Satellites and Seafloor-Walking Robots Changed What It Means to Study the Sea. PhD dissertation, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, https://doi.org/​10.7298/​X4XP735P.

UNOLS MERAS (University National Oceanographic Laboratories System for Maintaining an Environment of Respect Aboard Ships) Committee. 2019. Guidance to Ship Operators and Seagoing Scientists Concerning Crossing and Other Milestone Ceremonies Aboard Ship or In Port. 2 pp., https://www.unols.org/sites/default/files/MERAS_MilestoneCeremonies_White_Paper_final_011019.pdf.

Women in Ocean Science. 2021. Sexual Harassment in Marine Science. Women in Ocean Science CIC, 16 pp., https://www.womeninoceanscience.com/sexual-harassment.

Copyright & Usage

This is an open access article made available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution, and reproduction in any medium or format as long as users cite the materials appropriately, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate the changes that were made to the original content. Images, animations, videos, or other third-party material used in articles are included in the Creative Commons license unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If the material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license, users will need to obtain permission directly from the license holder to reproduce the material.